I watched the programme last night. I was quite disappointed in how it was put together, as it seemed to be a completely one-sided character assassination by a ‘former detective’ who is probably missing his old job and wants his five minutes of fame. The first half of the programme especially was very weak, and seemed to be damning him based on the account of a woman claiming she saw him with a girl who looked 14. In fairness, she could have been 18, and well into it, for all we know. Someone saying that someone looks 14 is not the way to open a programme basically damning a dead man unable to defend himself as a paedophile. The statements from the abused girls did have inconsistencies (a couple claiming he never kissed, wasn’t interested, while a couple claimed tongues down their throats), and while if these statements are true I have every sympathy for the abused girls, we all know that a story like this can get chancers and fantasists out of the woodwork making stuff up, especially if they are entitled to keep their anonymity.
The end part with the QC saying that he would be arrested on the basis of this evidence – well yep, I dare say he would be, but an arrest is not a conviction – if that was all the evidence they have, I’m convinced it wouldn’t results in a conviction.
Some of the things shown (like the Glitter statement) don’t show Saville in a great light, and on the balance of probabilities, he was probably up to no good and a very dodgy character – but I do think it’s unfair that a lot of the general population are now convinced of his guilt on the basis of a sensationalist ITV documentary (that had more than a whiff of Brass Eye about some of the scenes in it – why are we watching an actress in a park looking at a squirrel during one witness testimony?!). In court, this would not stand up as beyond reasonable doubt, and since the man hasn’t a chance to answer to these charges, I’m not going to convict him in my head just yet.
Oh, I do feel sorry for the people involved in his charitable foundation!